Groups organize to discuss U.S./Mexico border policy

Weintana Abraha Guest Writer

On Wednesday, Feb. 15, a lecture and conversation took place in Rockefeller Hall to discuss the rising tension regarding the ways in which the federal government is dealing with illegal immigration in the Southwest United States. Michael Velarde ’09 organized the event in conjunction with the Student Activist Union (SAU) and Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano/a de Aztlán (MECHA).
Originally planned as a protest on Feb. 14 in solidarity with the national “Day Without an Immigrant” protest, the format was changed by organizers into an open discussion with Geography Professor Joseph Nevins.

“The majority of people on this campus are, quite literally, sheltered from and are very much in the dark about most things related to the U.S.-Mexico border,” said Verlarde in an e-mailed statement. “The cruelty of our current immigration system [is] in dire need of a human element if any change is to be made.”

“I don't believe a protest could possibly convey that message, in a way that just sitting down and talking things out could,” continued Velarde.

The discussion focused on addressing potential problems that bill HR 4437—also known as the Border Protection Antiterrorism, and Illegal Immigration Control Act of 2005—might bring.
Both MeChA and SAU are voicing much concern about the humanitarian violations and safety hazards that HR 4437 could cause if it becomes a law.

“As you criminalize immigrants, there will be negative repercussions for human and civil rights,” said Nevins at the event.

The bill will create stricter immigration codes concerning both incoming and current illegal aliens residing in the United States. Illegal immigrants would have no access to public health facilities and any American citizen who attempted to give aid could be legally penalized.

The largest change to the law is that illegally crossing the border would go from a mere misdemeanor to a felony, with a sentence bringing prison time, instead of immediate deportation.

Supporters of the bill, including members of the Bush administration, claim that the bill would strengthen already existing legislation, which would not only be more efficient, but will improve national security. In a press release supporting the bill, the administration said that it supported many of the proposed changes, including amending what they call the practice of “catch and release,” where illegal immigrants from countries other than Mexico are given a court date for their deportation but never show up. They also claimed that the proposed legislation would be vital in their anti-terrorism campaign, because it more effectively controls border activity.
HR 4437 would double the current number of Border Patrol agents from 11,000 to 22,000 with a large number of the agents stationed in the Southwest’s most controversial (and popular) immigration hot-spots.

The distance of the border’s wired fences would increase from 100 miles to 800 miles. While this closes up border availability, opponents of the bill say that it also puts illegal immigrants in an even more dangerous—and potentially fatal—situation.

Statistics were presented during the discussion, including the fact that that in 2005, 460 bodies were found, and in the past ten years, at least 4,000 people died trying to cross the border.
“4,000 people are dead... [that’s like] two Vassar Colleges,” said Velarde at the talk.

Despite repeated promises from President Bush and Mexican President Vicente Fox to make the border as safe as possible, opponents of the current legislation say it is only creating a more dangerous setting for illegal immigrants.

The House of Representatives passed this bill on Dec. 16, 2005 and it is currently being debated in the Senate, with a possible vote from the Conference Committee in March.

Additional reporting by Fabian Arzuaga, News Editor